Richard Sandiford writes:
>> ** I also consider obsoleting support for the O32 ABI: the SGI linker used
>>is different from the N32/N64 ld, and has repeatedly caused problems
>>which couldn't be resolved even when SGI still had full IRIX
>>support. Also, the ISO C99 support in libc i
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 07:28:01AM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> However, it would not surprise me to discover that there are embedded
> systems out there still using o32, with assembly functions which
> expect the o32 calling convention. I would be cautious about removing
> support for o32 ent
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Richard Sandiford writes:
>
>>> ** I also consider obsoleting support for the O32 ABI: the SGI linker used
>>> is different from the N32/N64 ld, and has repeatedly caused problems
>>> which couldn't be resolved even when SGI still h
Richard Sandiford writes:
>> ** I also consider obsoleting support for the O32 ABI: the SGI linker used
>>is different from the N32/N64 ld, and has repeatedly caused problems
>>which couldn't be resolved even when SGI still had full IRIX
>>support. Also, the ISO C99 support in libc i
Rainer Orth writes:
> * IRIX before 6.5:
>
> ** IRIX 5.3 entered retired mode by the end of 1998. Patches are no
>longer available from support.sgi.com, and a full bootstrap and test
>cycle takes 8 1/2 days on the machines I have available, even without
>java/libgcj.
>
> ** IRIX 6.2
I'd like to obsolete support for some older versions of IRIX, Solaris,
and Tru64 UNIX which get increasingly difficult and time consuming to
support. The plan is to obsolete them in the GCC 4.5 release and remove
the support in GCC 4.6. That means that in GCC 4.5.x, an attempt to
configure for th
